CVE-2025-54482 in libbiosig
Summary
by MITRE • 08/25/2025
A stack-based buffer overflow vulnerability exists in the MFER parsing functionality of The Biosig Project libbiosig 3.9.0 and Master Branch (35a819fa). A specially crafted MFER file can lead to arbitrary code execution. An attacker can provide a malicious file to trigger this vulnerability.This vulnerability manifests on line 8751 of biosig.c on the current master branch (35a819fa), when the Tag is 4:
else if (tag==4) {
// SPR if (len>4) fprintf(stderr,"Warning MFER tag4 incorrect length %i>4\n",len); curPos += ifread(buf,1,len,hdr);
VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.
Analysis
by VulDB Data Team • 09/02/2025
The CVE-2025-54482 vulnerability represents a critical stack-based buffer overflow in the libbiosig library version 3.9.0 and master branch, specifically within the MFER file parsing functionality. This vulnerability stems from inadequate input validation during the processing of MFER (Medical File Format) data structures, creating a path for remote code execution when maliciously crafted files are processed. The flaw exists in the biosig.c source file at line 8751, where the parsing logic handles Tag value 4, which corresponds to SPR (Sample Rate Parameter) data elements in the MFER format. The vulnerability manifests when the length parameter exceeds the expected bounds, yet the code fails to properly validate or constrain buffer operations, creating a classic stack overflow condition that can be exploited by attackers to execute arbitrary code.
The technical implementation of this vulnerability occurs within the conditional branch handling Tag 4 in the MFER parsing routine, where the code performs a length check but does not properly manage the buffer allocation or copying operations. The function ifread is called with a buffer size determined by the len parameter, but without adequate bounds checking or memory protection mechanisms. This creates a scenario where an attacker can craft an MFER file with an oversized length field for Tag 4, causing the program to write beyond the allocated buffer space on the stack. The CWE-121 classification applies here as this represents a classic stack buffer overflow vulnerability where insufficient bounds checking allows memory corruption. The vulnerability's exploitation potential is heightened by the fact that the library is designed for medical data processing, making it a likely target for attackers seeking to compromise healthcare systems or research environments where such libraries are deployed.
The operational impact of this vulnerability extends across various domains where libbiosig is utilized, including medical imaging systems, research laboratories, and healthcare data processing environments. Attackers could exploit this vulnerability through file upload mechanisms, email attachments, or network-based file transfers, potentially gaining full system control on devices processing MFER files. The ATT&CK framework categorizes this as a code injection technique under T1059, specifically T1059.007 for command and script interpreter, where the buffer overflow enables arbitrary code execution. The vulnerability affects systems running libbiosig versions 3.9.0 and earlier, with the master branch containing the same flaw at the identified line number. This makes the vulnerability particularly concerning as it affects both stable and development versions of the library, potentially exposing a wide range of applications that depend on medical file processing capabilities.
Mitigation strategies should focus on immediate code patching and input validation enhancements to prevent buffer overflow conditions. The primary fix involves implementing proper bounds checking before buffer operations, ensuring that the len parameter is validated against maximum allowable buffer sizes before any memory copying occurs. Security patches should enforce strict length limits on all MFER tag processing, particularly for Tag 4, and implement proper error handling for malformed input files. Organizations should also consider implementing runtime protections such as stack canaries, address space layout randomization, and data execution prevention mechanisms to reduce exploitability. Additionally, input sanitization should be enhanced to reject MFER files with suspicious length parameters or malformed structures. The vulnerability underscores the importance of robust input validation in medical data processing libraries, as these systems often handle sensitive patient information and require heightened security measures to prevent unauthorized access or system compromise. Regular security audits and dependency updates should be implemented to address similar vulnerabilities in other medical data processing components.